Network Structures: Working Differently and Changing Expectations

There is a growing need for innovative methods of dealing with complex, social problems. New types of collaborative efforts have emerged as a result of the inability of more traditional bureaucratic hierarchical arrangements such as departmental programs to resolve these problems. Network structures are one such arrangement that is at the forefront of this movement. Although collaboration through network structures establishes an innovative response to dealing with social issues, there remains an expectation that outcomes and processes are based on traditional ways of working. It is necessary for practitioners and policy makers alike to begin to understand the realities of what can be expected from network structures in order to maximize the benefits of these unique mechanisms.     

United States Public Response to Terrorism: Fault Lines or Bedrock?1

We test traditional assumptions about the volatility of mass opinion in times of national crises using data about views of terrorism from national surveys of the United States general public in 1995 and 1997, findings from a national survey immediately following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11), and panel data from a follow‐up survey in 2002. We compare public assessments of the threat of terrorism, willingness to restrict speech to prevent terrorism, support for employing conventional military force against countries that support terrorism, and levels of certainty about culpability required prior to using military force. Results show stable and measured public views prior to 9/11, immediately following the events of that date, and in the subsequent year. Our findings support democratic and modernist theories of public capacities while challenging long‐standing traditional precepts about widespread volatility of mass public opinion.     

Is Age Irrelevant? Perceptions of Young and Old Adult Eyewitnesses

In Experiment 1, we videotaped elderly and younger adults (n = 69) reporting their memories for a crime video. The seniors were significantly less accurate than the younger adults. In Experiment 2, participants viewed the testimony videotapes and rated the elderly as less credible than the younger adults. In Experiment 3, participant-jurors (n = 302) evaluated transcribed testimonies provided by Experiment 1 participants. The ostensible age of the witnesses was manipulated. Thus, some participants read a senior's testimony believing it was provided by a younger adult and vice versa. Participants were apparently not biased by negative stereotypes of seniors' eyewitness capabilities.     

The Myth of the Bureaucratic Paradigm: What Traditional Public Administration Really Stood For

For a decade, public administration and management literature has featured a riveting story: the transformation of the field's orientation from an old paradigm to a new one. While many doubt claims concerning a new paradigm—a New Public Management—few question that there was an old one. An ingrained and narrowly focused pattern of thought, a "bureaucratic paradigm," is routinely attributed to public administration's traditional literature. A careful reading of that literature reveals, however, that the bureaucratic paradigm is, at best, a caricature and, at worst, a demonstrable distortion of traditional thought that exhibited far more respect for law, politics, citizens, and values than the new, customer-oriented managerialism and its variants. Public administration as a profession, having let lapse the moral and intellectual authority conferred by its own traditions, mounts an unduly weak challenge to the superficial thinking and easy answers of the many new paradigms of governance and public service. As a result, literature and discourse too often lack the recognition that reformers of institutions and civic philosophies must show how the capacity to effect public purposes and accountability to the polity will be enhanced in a manner that comports with our Constitution and our republican institutions.     

Y-STR profiling in extended interval (> or = 3 days) postcoital cervicovaginal samples

Depending upon specific situations, some victims of sexual assault provide vaginal samples more than 36-48 h after the incident. We have tested the ability of commercial and in-house Y-STR systems to provide DNA profiles from extended interval (> or =3 days) postcoital samples. The commercial Y-STR systems tested included the AmpFlSTR Yfiler (Applied Biosystems), PowerPlex Y (Promega) and Y-PLEX 12 (Reliagene) products whereas the in-house systems comprised Multiplex I (MPI) and Multiplex B (MPB). Three donor couples were recruited for the study. Postcoital cervicovaginal swabs (x2) were recovered by each of the three females at specified intervals after sexual intercourse (3-7 days). Each time point sample was collected after a separate act of sexual intercourse and was preceded by a 7-day abstention period. As a negative control, a precoital swab was also recovered prior to coitus for each sampling and only data from postcoital samples that demonstrated a lack of male DNA in the associated precoital sample was used. A number of DNA profile enhancement strategies were employed including sampling by cervical brushing, nondifferential DNA extraction methodology, and post-PCR purification. Full Y-STR profiles from cervicovaginal samples recovered 3-4 days after intercourse were routinely obtained. Profiles were also obtainable 5-6 days postcoitus although by this stage partial profiles rather than full profiles were a more likely outcome. The DNA profiles from the sperm fraction of a differential lysis were superior to that obtained when a nondifferential method was employed in that the allelic signal intensities were generally higher and more balanced and exhibited less baseline noise. The incorporation of a simple post-PCR purification process significantly increased the ability to obtain Y-STR profiles, particularly from 5- to 6-day postcoital samples. Remarkably an 8 locus Y-STR profile was obtained from a 7-day postcoital sample, which is approaching the reported time limit for sperm detection in the cervix.     

Addressing Gaps in the Maturity of Judgment Literature: Age Differences and Delinquency

Over the past decade, a majority of states have legislated to expand their capacity to try adolescents as adults [Griffin (2003). Trying and sentencing juveniles as adults: An analysis of state transfer and blended sentencing laws. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice]. In response, researchers have investigated factors that may affect adolescent culpability [Steinberg and Scott (Am Psychol 58(12):1009–1018, 2003)]. Research on immature judgment posits that psychosocial influences on adolescent decision processes results in reduced criminal responsibility [Cauffman and Steinberg (Behav Sci Law 18(6):741–760, 2000); Scott, Reppucci, and Woolard (Law Hum Behav 19(3):221–244, 1995); Steinberg and Cauffman (Law Hum Behav 20(3):249–272, 1996)]. The current study utilizes hypothetical vignettes and standardized measures of maturity of judgment (responsibility, temperance, and perspective) to examine gaps in previous maturity of judgment findings (Cauffman and Steinberg 2000). This work suggests that adolescents (ages 14–17) display less responsibility and perspective relative to college students (ages 18–21), young-adults (ages 22–27), and adults (ages 28–40). Further, this research finds no maturity of judgment differences between delinquent and non-delinquent youth, but does find significant maturity of judgment differences between high and low delinquency male youth. Finally, results show that maturity of judgment predicts self-reported delinquency beyond the contributions of age, gender, race, education level, SES, and antisocial decision making. Implications for the juvenile justice system are discussed. This research was conducted in partial fulfillment of the M.A degree in Psychology from the University of New Hampshire.